My carrying a gun doesn't affect you adversely in any way at all, unless I assault you. In which case the offense is the assault, not the gun.
That's partly because you know if you see somebody with a gun in Detroit, he's a criminal. Because normal law abiding citizens aren't allowed. That's the balance of power shift that I was talking about.
Guns aren't violent at all. Guns are inanimate machines. PEOPLE are violent. And that's true whether they have guns or not.
And, frankly, violence is morally neutral. It can be used for good or for evil. If I employ violence to steal from you or rape your wife, then it's bad. If I employ violence to save you from an attacker, then it's inarguably good.
Here again, this is the balance of power. We need (IMO) to shift the power back in favor of those who will use violence only defensively (for good), to stop those who will use it offensively for personal gain (to commit crimes).
I'm sorry but I can't agree with you. I, not being a criminal, am no more dangerous to you whether the thing I'm holding is a gun or a kitten. And that's equally true for the vast majority of people. And as for those who ARE dangerous, they're dangerous with or without guns.